I just looked the referenced post...I didn't say "similarly measured speakers get less hate here"....that's someone else's post.
My bad, issue with replying.
Yes, well if this place is all about objectivity, let’s remain objective and assess the speaker in question on it’s measurements, not some perceived slight by it’s creator (who arguably has a right to be here as well). Throwing around terms like “con artist” seems a little hysterical to me.
The data from the measurement are objective, Mr. Alexander is saying that the objective data is "botched" and the scientific method and interpretation of the data are fundamentally wrong;
essentially attacking the expose by way of discrediting fundamental facts and data.
OK, we are willing to entertain that decades of research done by Dr. Toole and his associates (who holds PhDs and Masters in engineering and physics btw) are somehow grossly wrong. But Mr. Alexander provides no logical, scientific, technical, factual, rationale or reasoned explanation on any of his claims or statements, even when asked multiple times.
Hence, it leaves no entry point for an intellectual discussion, let alone scrutiny by subject matter experts.
Mr. Alexander refuses to engage in any form of logical, scientific, technical, factual, rationale nor reasoned discussion; instead
he retorts to sprinkling in vague, make-believe science and refers to testimonials and "accolades" by the naive, uneducated and unwashed as solid prove on how great his products are.
The above in
bold are the standard, textbook MO of a con artist.
Furthermore, Mr. Alexander exhibits extreme
confidence ("3 seconds" to make a flat anechoic FR speaker, can make some "drool and slobber"), which is the underlying hallmark characteristics of all
confidence
artists.
Sorry, it quacks like a duck, it walks like a duck, it looks like a duck. . .I'm going to call it a duck.